1 2026:CGHC:13133 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1048 of 2026 1 - Hadaran Singh S/o Beer Singh Aged About 65 Years R/o Bijhra, Gevra Pariyojna, Binjhra Vijay Nagar, Kosmanda, Binjhri, Deepka, District Korba, Chhattisgarh- 495452 2 - Itwar Singh Kanwar S/o Jugal Singh Aged About 74 Years R/o Mn1162, Prem Nagar, Bhairotaal, Korba (Municipal Corporation Korba), Gevra Basti, District Korba, Chhattisgarh- 495454 3 - Budhwar Singh S/o Bulalu Ram Aged About 82 Years R/o House No. 899, Anad Nagar, Bhairotaal Municipal Corporation Korba, Korba Gevra Basti, District Korba, Chhattisgarh 495454 4 - Umend Singh S/o Anand Ram Aged About 52 Years R/o Makan No. 519, Bharosal Basti, Municipal Corporation Korba, P.O. Kusmunda, District Korba, Chhattisgarh- 495454 5 - Shrilekha W/o Shesh Prasad Kanwar Aged About 46 Years R/o Bhairotaal, Ward No. 48, Municipal Corporation Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh- 495454 6 - Mangal Bhavan Kanwar S/o Ghasi Singh Aged About 50 Years R/o Prem Nagar, Bhairotaal, Ward No. 54, Municipal Corporation Korba, Gevra Basti, District Korba, Chhattisgarh- 495454 7 - Asgar Ali S/o Johar Ali Aged About 45 Years R/o House No. 535, Kuchena, Bhairotaal Ward No. 54, Municipal Corporation Korba, Korba, Gevra Basti, District Korba, Chhattisgarh 495454 8 - Lakshman Singh S/o Dau Singh Aged About 52 Years R/o House No. 321, Kuchena, Kuchena Basti, Ward No. 54, Municipal Corporation Korba, Korba, Gevra Basti, District Korba, Chhattisgarh 495454 ... Petitioners versus RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2026.03.20 11:44:39 +0530 2 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) 2 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) And Land Acquisition Officer Katghora, District Korba (C.G.) 3 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department (Bridge Construction), Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Tahsildar, Katghora District- Korba (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title, as taken from CIS system) For Petitioners : Ms. Aashi Bhattacharya, Adv. For State/ Respondents : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 19/03/2026 1. Heard. 2. Issue notice to the respondents. 3. Learned State counsel accepts notice on behalf of all the respondents, hence issuance of notice to them is dispensed with. 4. Also heard on admission. 5. This petition has been preferred by petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:- “ i. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction, including a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to reassess and pay just and fair compensation to the petitioners in accordance with the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement, Act, 2013, by applying the statutory formula under Sections 26 to 30, taking into account the correct market value, location, and potential of the acquired lands situated in Villages Kuchena and Bhairotaal, District Korba (C.G.). ii. That this Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to direct the respondents to pay to the petitioners all 3 consequential statutory benefits, including 100% solatium, 12% additional amount per annum from the date of notification till the date of award, and interest at 9% per annum for the first year and 15% per annum thereafter, as mandated under Sections 69 and 80 of the 2013 Act. iii. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to declare the impugned Award dated 30/08/2024 and 30/09/2004 (Annexure P-1) as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to law, and direct a fresh determination of compensation in accordance with the provisions of the 2013 Act and the relevant rules framed thereunder. iv. Any other relief or order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, just, and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted in the interest of justice.” 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are residents of Villages Bhairotaal and Kuchena, Tehsil Katghora, District Korba (CG). Their respective lands have been acquired for construction of Katghora-Hardibazar-Baloda-Akaltara Road under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (henceforth referred to as “Act, 2013”). However, the compensation granted to the petitioners under various heads is neither appropriate nor adequate, and full compensation has not been granted to them. Hence, learned counsel prays that the present petition be admitted for hearing. 7. In reply, learned counsel for the State/Respondents submits that the grievance of the petitioners pertains to the assessment of the quantum of compensation under various heads. Therefore, the petitioners may file an application under Section 64 of the Act, 2013 before the Collector, who, in turn, shall refer the matter to the Authority. As such, in 4 its present form, the present writ petition is not maintainable, as an efficacious alternative remedy is already available to the petitioners. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 9. Section 64 of the Act, 2013 provides that if any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Authority, as the case may be, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the person to whom it is payable, etc. 10. Thus, since an efficacious alternative statutory remedy is available to the petitioners under Section 64 of the Act, 2013, this Court is not inclined to entertain the instant petition by invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, hence the same is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioners to file an application under Section 64 of the Act, 2013 before the concerned Collector. It is further observed that, in the event such application is filed, the concerned Collector shall not insist upon the period of limitation for filing the application. 11. With aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. 12. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Rukhsar